tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19736311.post4154183231976184378..comments2023-09-03T07:25:45.078-07:00Comments on Gaffney Journal: Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes: Part IIGaffneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18293658542211510275noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19736311.post-66633637459205870062009-03-11T16:46:00.000-07:002009-03-11T16:46:00.000-07:00'Yes' to all your observations. But you are almost...'Yes' to all your observations. But you are almost kind when refering to the violence and sex.<BR/><BR/>It went beyond poor creative decision making, it was insulting to the viewer. It was an assumption that the audience wanted to see such an inane level of violence. I felt degraded by it, not just distracted, because I knew the violence, and graphic sex, was not there for any other reason than to titilate. That might have worked for a film like Sin City which was pure pulp fiction, but not Watchmen. <BR/><BR/>I liked your observation that this was really two stories fighting for our attention in one film. It looks and feels like a superhero movie and is marketed as such. But at heart this is was supposed to be a story about the grey zone of vigilantism. I saw more black than grey.<BR/><BR/>But there is a third element, the gorn. It looks and feels like a horror film. One of those really vicious ones that dare you to watch and see how much gore you can take.<BR/><BR/>I can't help but feel the filmmakers pulled a bait-and-switch on comic fans.<BR/><BR/>And I think I know what you're going to say about the film's heart. One word: flatline.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com